WHAT the Republicans painstakingly constructed here was meant to look like the biggest of tents. And still they couldnt spare so much as a sleeping bags worth of space for the likes of me.

Women were welcomed. During the prime evening television hours, the convention stage was festooned with them, and when they werent at the microphone, they were front and center in mens remarks. Paul Ryan and Mitt Romney both gushed about their moms in tributes as tactical as they were teary.

And while one preconvention poll suggested that roughly zero percent of African-Americans support Romney, Republicans found several prominent black leaders to testify for him. Condoleezza Rice, the former secretary of state, delivered what will surely be remembered as the conventions most stirring and substantive remarks, purged of catcalls and devoid of slickly rendered fibs.

But you certainly didnt see anyone openly gay on the stage in Tampa. More to the point, you didnt hear mention of gays and lesbians. Scratch that: Mike Huckabee, who has completed a ratings-minded transformation from genial pol to dyspeptic pundit, made a derisive reference to President Obamas support for same-sex marriage. We were thus allowed a fleeting moment inside the tent, only to be flogged and sent back out into the cold.

Many Freepers have their suspicions, but so far, after he had to fire that gay guy he hired to be his spokesman (for something), Romney and his rowdy boys have pretty much kept quiet on their interests in gays.

Oh, yeah, he did slip up twice ~ wanted forced adoptions of straight chillun' to flamboyant gays, and he wanted homosexual activists to become scoutmasters.

Otherwise, pretty quiet ~ no big thing ~ dude's probably going to get busted for some of this stuff some day, but pretty quiet at the moment.

You do realize that convention delegates were chosen months ago by local and state conventions all across the country right? You do realize that even a small space would be reserved for ... a REPUBLICAN, right?

6
posted on 09/03/2012 6:38:17 AM PDT
by GeronL
(The Right to Life came before the Right to Pursue Happiness)

I count the homosexual population as being one of the most intransigent segment of the voting population. But they’re only two or three percent of the voters. And even given the so-called anti-gay agenda of the Republicans, they still get about one third of the homosexual vote. That means to pander to the homosexual lobby would be to try and placate about one or two percent of the population. And that assumes all homosexuals vote which they don’t. Pandering would lose more votes for the Pubbies than they would gain. So what’s the point in pandering?

About 2% of the population, and probably 50% of network new is gay. Actually I don’t know how many, but the media is full of gays. That is the only reason it’s an issue. IMO, I though what someone did sexually was nobody’s business if there are two consenting adults. If so, why is it an issue?

So they are going to use the convention to bash Romney the straight guy, acting as if there is something wrong with being straight. The Hollywood crowd hates the straight lifestyle. They are in love with the gay lifestyle. How did everything gets so twisted in this country?

homosexuals and they are that as they’re not gay shout out the loudest, they got into media and the arts.
Then they use NAZI thuggery against anyone who opposes their mental sickness.

Two lies we hear all the tima and even their trolls on here say this.
Well they won, it;s over.
Er no it is not, the young are not fine with it and I have children and all of them including their friends find it sick , their friends of my kids friends too.

The other lie is how they try and make it out they are bigger % wise than tey are.

Also I will also call them what they are and it is not gay, they use that word to make it sound their agenda is happy etc,
They’re homosexuals plain and simple and if they do not like the truth then they need ot seek mental help and have natural healthy sex

The majority of mass murderers, from Dahlmer, to John Wayne
Gacy, to Wayne Williams, the list goes on, were sodomites.

“Dr. Charles Socarides, in his classic “The Overt Homosexual” documents that a major attribute of the overt homosexual is aggression  often repressed aggression. This is supported by psychology professor, Dr. Frank du Mas who says that homosexuals often are mass killers who also torture their victims indicating “a higher intensity of aggression.”

Ludwig Tiene was the executioner at Auschwitz, the Nazi prison camp, who was responsible for killing as many as 100 boys and young men per day! He crushed, strangled and gnawed them to death while he raped them”

I was just in Manhattan for the past few days with the family. Just walking down the street there seemed to be a much larger than average concentration of gay men there. Since the left only believes the real country is in the urban centers, they likely have a distorted view of the number of gays and the power they hold over regular ordinary straight people throughout the rest of the country.

I read that the worst 6 serial killers were all homosexuals or had feelings towards it.

Way I see it homosexuality is a mental sickness and instead of trying to cure these people we have liberal shrinks telling tem it is OK ot be different.

If people really cared about their so called homosexual pals then they woudl help them not encourage tem , we only have to look at where the colon is, where the prostate is feces on their penis.
Look at how they hang out at rest stops, public bathrooms, dog parks,walking trails etc.

A survey just came out saying that a child does much better with a natraul norma, couple than two homosexuals playing family.

The sad part is that we have some on hee and elsewhere in this country saying they have won , we have lost, more younger people support it but that is not true either and the usual ignorant comments of the year goes to those who say”I have two homosexuals friends and they are nice , they just want to be with each other and I have no problem with them “

If the Democratic party plank includes support for same-sex marriages, Obama's campaign is doomed. People forget that if put to a vote, same-sex marriages are usually voted down by very large margins--even in California!

And still they couldnt spare so much as a sleeping bags worth of space for the likes of me.

He is a white male, of Italian extraction. Rick Santorum "looks like" him. So what's the problem? Oh yeah, he likes to bend over for men. What does that have to do with Obama's $16 trillion in debt, rule by fiat, or appeasement of Iran?

What is there about a personal preference for performing acts of sexual intercourse with other persons of one’s own sex that should merit special recognition or considerations, or benefits or privileges?
What is there about this preference, indulged by a very small minority of the populace, that the rest of us should care about? What makes it a fitting object of pride?

Seriously!! To homosexuals I say: Just do your private business in private and shut up!!

Well, there is that matter of mega-multiple, anonymous, virus-spreading couplings in those wondrous bath houses. So much for privacy.

Hm... This is a puzzler. Why on earth WOULDN'T the GOP pander to a tiny percentage of the voters, when doing so would offend a larger percentage of their traditional voting base, when even doing that pandering would do very little to change the voting habits of that tiny percentage of the voters? They must simply be evil and crazy. Clearly, there's no other reason that one could possibly deduce from the given facts.

I'll go ahead and hold my breath waiting for the MSM to wonder aloud why the DNC isn't reaching out to coal and oil industry contractors and executives.

47
posted on 09/03/2012 9:32:03 AM PDT
by Teacher317
('Tis time to fear when tyrants seem to kiss.)

Gays constitute a tiny minority of the U.S. population, less than 2% to be precise.

WeasleZippers are reading comprehension challenged. They say, "less than 2% to be precise," yet linked to an article stating, "estimated 8.2 percent of the population had engaged in some form same-sex sexual activity."

Huh.

As an aside, how is "less than 2%" precise, meaning "marked by exactness and accuracy of expression or detail," when the article itself had fixed a specific number? That's sloppy writing.

A percentage is irrelevant without putting a demographic number on it. Even at 1%, that number is roughly equal to the population of our 5 least populated states plus D.C. combined. At 1.7%, the lowest number mentioned in the article, that expands to 7 states plus D.C (24 electoral votes worth, between PA & FL).

WZ cherry-picked the smallest percentage in an foolhardy effort to minimize the group--a typical, flawed tactic--when there is no necessity and, more damningly, their own citation is self-contradictory.

It is a waste of time to focus on the size of the sub-population when arguing these issues not only because studies vary widely as clear in their own chosen article but because we would never stand for it when it comes to the 1.7%-2.2% of Americans who are ethnic Jews.

It's such a stupid talking-point that needless distracts from morality, tradition and other grounds. It's also self defeating. If the population is so tiny, it can be said, why all the fuss about a threat posed?

Intransigent? Perhaps, perhaps not. Republicans have made steady inroads with those voters since 2000, moving from only one in five to one in three.

Even taking a third of the "gay vote" shows they may be more apt to vote Republican than a comparably sized population if you accept the lowest estimates of how many gays there are: American Jews who went 8/10 for Obama in 2008.

Would many advocate abandoning the Jewish vote when they supported the most socialist candidate they could find in every presidential election in the past 100 years?

In my experience talking politics with self-identified gays--practicing and celibate--from the wealthy to the working poor, out and closeted alike, economic issues are a very high priority but so is personal liberty.

The younger ones often fit well in the "libertarian conservative" wing of the Republican Party; some of them realize it and vote Republican. Others who are older have a loathing of modern Republicans because they see the party as beholden to radical evangelical religious social conservatives, yet they espouse Republican views on issues of taxation, monetary policy, foreign policy, personal freedom, free markets, size of gov't and so forth.

It's ironic Gov. Daniels was excoriated for suggesting budgetary and economic issues take a priority role in 2012 over social policy and yet Republicans' biggest success has come with the Tea Party movement, with whom his critics identify, that does just that.

Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.